The period between the first and second. §4. Economic situation during the period between the First and Second World Wars. Excerpt characterizing the Interwar period

The geopolitical situation in Europe and the world after the First World War changed greatly. The system of world balance of the post-war period was disrupted by two factors: the Treaty of Versailles, which placed Germany in the most humiliating conditions, and the 1917 revolution in Russia. Both factors will become the source of new social upheavals and the Second World War: the first because such humiliation of an entire nation could not but push it towards revanchist sentiments; the second - because the Bolsheviks proclaimed their goal (along with the construction of socialism) the world proletarian revolution and made certain efforts to implement it as quickly as possible, maximally stimulating for this the activities of the Communist International.
The Treaty of Versailles put Germany in an extremely difficult situation; in fact, it found itself in international isolation. This was facilitated by both the policy of the victorious powers and the policy of Soviet Russia, which was in a similar position and therefore became a kind of “natural ally” of Germany, which took advantage of the situation and, blackmailing the victorious countries with the possibility of forming a German-Soviet union, forced them to go for certain concessions. Another reason for France, England and the United States to want an economic revival of Germany was that the impoverished country that Germany had become simply could not pay the huge reparations imposed on it.
France found itself in the most difficult situation: having lost its natural continental ally - Russia, it gained in the neighborhood a potentially more dangerous enemy than before the war - Germany. In addition, the French were worried about the Soviet-German rapprochement. Throughout the 20s - 30s. France will try to correct the situation by creating a system of alliances with the “small” countries of Europe (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Romania). However, this does not compensate for Russia’s “dropout” from world politics. All this - together with the position of England, which had more moderate views on the position of Germany (caused by Great Britain's reluctance to French dominance on the continent) - made it very difficult to achieve the main goal of French foreign policy - maintaining the situation in Europe in the form in which it had formed after world war.
The only country for which the war brought positive changes was the United States of America, which turned from a European debtor into the largest creditor. Two directions have emerged in American foreign policy: traditional - isolationist - and new, internationalist. Supporters of the first insisted on the rejection of “automatic” participation in European affairs and extreme caution in matters of accepting international obligations. Supporters of the second spoke about the “historical mission” of the United States, which is to bring the light of the liberal idea to all countries and peoples. The struggle of these trends ended in the victory of the internationalists. As a result, the interwar world turned out to be structured in such a way that practically no serious problem of European politics could be solved without American participation. The United States continued to invest in Europe in peacetime, which, combined with the policy of protectionism towards European goods, which denied them access to the US domestic market, also adversely affected the European situation.
The United States proposed its own solution to the German issue - the Dawes reparation plan, which was supposed to ensure Germany's continued payments of reparations (and at the same time open the German market to America as much as possible). His most important task was to stabilize the German mark. This plan established the size of payments to Germany and the Allied control over the German state budget, finances and railways. In 1929, due to the slow recovery of the German economy, this plan was revised. The new plan (the Young Plan) provided for a slight reduction in the amount of annual payments and the elimination of foreign control bodies. The adoption of Jung's plan had one distant but very important consequence: it was during its approval that an agreement was reached on the withdrawal of Allied troops from the Rhineland. This happened in the summer of 1930 and allowed Hitler to send German troops there in March 1936.
The First World War brought Japan into the ranks of active players in the world political arena, becoming a powerful dominant force in Asia and the Pacific. Decades behind Western countries in technology, it needed colonies where it could export its products without fear of competition from Western goods. Conflicting interests with the United States and Great Britain led to the rupture of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1921; As for the United States, for them Japan never ceased to be a potential enemy. All this led to a rapprochement between Japan and Germany, which resulted in their alliance in World War II.
The entire 20s were marked by the problem of the allies' debts to each other and the reparation payments that they were supposed to receive from Germany. The main creditor was the USA, and the main debtors were France, Italy, Belgium and the UK. Negotiations on this issue lasted four years (from 1922 to 1926) and ended with an agreement that provided for the return of $2.6 billion, that is, a little more than a quarter of the amount originally requested by the States.
As for the problem of reparations, here too there were serious contradictions between the allies, and, above all, on the issue of the dependence of inter-allied debts on the payment of German reparations: France considered them strictly interconnected and assumed to pay its debts from what it received from Germany, and the USA and Britain considered German reparations a separate issue. Numerous attempts to achieve a compromise on this issue did not lead to success, and on December 26, 1922, the reparation commission, by three votes to one, stated that Germany had failed to fulfill its reparation obligations and, as a result, declared Germany in default, which (according to the Treaty of Versailles) gave France the right to occupy the Rhineland and Ruhr. Meanwhile, social inequality and unemployment grew in Germany. Anti-Versailles sentiments were superimposed on the social tensions usual in such conditions: the Germans accused the great powers of intending to completely ruin the country with reparations. The desire of the communists to subdue these anti-government and anti-foreign sentiments and channel them into a revolutionary direction did not help to defuse the situation. All this was accompanied by a rise in anti-Semitism, partly provoked by the influx of wealthy Jewish emigrants from Poland to Germany (where, under the Pilsudski regime, anti-Semitism became almost state policy), since this emigration coincided with the deterioration of the economic situation in Germany.
The occupation of the Rhineland escalated the situation to the limit, which resulted in armed uprisings and protests by both left and right forces, which, however, were poorly prepared and suppressed. As a result, a state of emergency was declared in the country. Great Britain and the United States blamed France for the aggravation of the situation in Germany and put it at risk of isolation by signing agreements with Germany at the end of 1923 to provide it with loans. From now on, in its confrontation with France, Germany could firmly count on the help of London and Washington.
The shocks caused by the consequences of the First World War subsided by 1924. At this time, important changes began to occur in the world related to the change in the role and place of the social democratic movement in the socio-political life of states. This was manifested by the “entry into power” of social democratic parties and the strengthening of the influence of reformist ideas in the ranks of social democracy. Both of these points were both a consequence and a reason that the theory and practice of social democratic parties increasingly acquired a reformist orientation with an emphasis on the gradual peaceful transformation of capitalist society into socialist society. The leaders of social democracy considered their main task to be participation in the work of the parliamentary system and the restructuring of the capitalist economy through “equal business cooperation” between workers and entrepreneurs, as well as through the adoption of social legislation.
Representatives of the communist parties absolutized the trends of the acute crisis of capitalism, on the basis of which they demanded an immediate armed and uncompromising struggle for power. Most of these parties, united in the Communist International (Comintern), were under the strong influence of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), which was the reason for such a position.
The change in the role of social democracy in the political life of European states was evidence of the growing crisis of traditional forms of statehood in the post-war development of Europe. However, if in countries with established traditions of bourgeois democracy this process proceeded quite peacefully, then in countries where democratic traditions had not yet taken root, the liberal-reformist path turned out to be extremely difficult, or even impossible. Here, the place of social democracy was often taken by reactionary mass movements, which ultimately led to the elimination of bourgeois democracy and the establishment of totalitarian dictatorship of various kinds (fascism) or other, more traditional forms of authoritarian dictatorial regimes.
In general, we can say that in the 1920s two trends emerged in the political development of states: liberal-reformist (based on the further development of parliamentary democracy, the implementation of reforms and the involvement of leaders of socialist or social democratic parties in the highest bodies of power); totalitarian, associated with the establishment of fascist and other dictatorial regimes.
Economic stabilization of the 20s. ended on Black Friday, October 24, 1929, with the collapse of the New York Stock Exchange, which was the result of a severe crisis of overproduction, called the “Great Depression” and affecting not only the United States, but also Western Europe. The reason for such a rapid spread of the crisis is that after the end of the First World War, the United States actually turned into a global creditor, and the economies of other capitalist countries were more or less “tied” to the American economy, the collapse of which also hit them. Since the crisis gripped the entire capitalist world, not a single country could get out of it through exports. The crisis also affected international relations - it was during these years that the collapse of the Versailles-Washington peace system began.
The immediate causes of the crisis were: 1) stock market speculation, which led to the fact that the selling price of shares began to significantly exceed their real value; 2) the “banking boom” of the 20s, when almost every town had its own bank, most often organized according to the “financial pyramid” principle. The collapse of the New York Stock Exchange led to a sharp drop in the market value of securities. At the same time, the crisis was growing in the banking sector, as many sought to withdraw their savings - this led to both the massive collapse of “pyramids” and small honest banks.
The Great Depression led to a curtailment of production and a reduction in acreage. The crisis has gripped all sectors of the economy of all capitalist countries of the world. The situation was aggravated by the sharp deterioration in the financial situation of the proletariat and the middle class, which led to an explosion of class struggle, manifested in the mass strike movement and in the turn towards the creation of the Popular Fronts.
The way out of the crisis was state-monopoly capitalism, the development of which followed two main directions - bourgeois reformist and fascist.
Bourgeois reformism. The policy of bourgeois reformism manifested itself most clearly in the United States, where its culmination was the “new course” of President F. Roosevelt, in which measures of state regulation of the economy were combined with social reforms. The concept of government intervention in the economy was developed in detail on the eve of the First World War, which only confirmed its correctness. However, after the war, the United States abandoned it. In countries where the policy of bourgeois reformism was carried out, it, strengthening the influence of the state on various spheres of life, became a real alternative to totalitarianism, softening and then eliminating the social consequences of the global economic crisis. This path was followed by states with a high level of development of the national economy, a stable social structure and long-established political institutions.
Roosevelt's program was broadly expressed in four laws: the National Industrial Recovery Act, the Agricultural Regulation Act, the Labor Relations Act, and the Social Security Act. The Industry Law established the right of the state to intervene in the affairs of private industrialists. The purpose of this intervention was to stop overproduction by reducing the output of goods. The law obliged entrepreneurs to recognize trade unions at their enterprises and enter into collective agreements with them that would protect the rights of workers and provide for the organization of large public works at the expense of the state, which was supposed to reduce unemployment. The Law on Agriculture helped to avoid overstocking the market by increasing prices for products and raw materials, reducing acreage and reducing the number of livestock. The Labor Relations Act also required capitalists to recognize trade unions and established penalties for harassing union organizers and other anti-union practices. The Social Security Act introduced a government-run system of pensions and benefits for the first time in American history.
Roosevelt began the transformation with the “rehabilitation” of the state’s financial system. All banks were closed. After verification, permission to resume work and receive government loans was received only by those who proved that they pay interest on deposits from income received through the investment of depositors' funds in production and shares. The abolition of the gold standard and the devaluation of the dollar increased the financial resources of the state and became the basis for further reforms.
Another option for overcoming the crisis was fascism. The process of its emergence proceeded differently in different countries. But the decisive years can still be called 1922 - 1923, when its similar features appeared in different countries and its manifestations attracted everyone's attention. But before we talk about fascism, we should dwell on the concept of “totalitarianism,” of which it is a special case. The characteristic features of a totalitarian regime are: the presence in the country of a single mass party led by a charismatic leader; restriction of the rights and freedoms of citizens in all areas, while the laws are on the side of the state, not the individual; the existence of an official ideology that is obligatory for recognition by all citizens; state monopoly on media and weapons; a system of terrorist police control (when a person can be subjected to “preventive detention”, that is, to be taken into custody not by a court verdict, but on suspicion of committing a crime, or even on suspicion of the possibility or intention of an illegal act); a centralized system of control and management of the economy by the state.
In the 1930s, fascism was at different stages of development in different European countries. In general, four groups of states can be distinguished: 1) countries in which the fascist movement did not have much influence on the bourgeois-democratic system of statehood. These are mainly countries with established democratic traditions (England, France, USA, Belgium, Ireland, Norway, Brazil, etc.); 2) countries where the fascist movement attracted a certain part of the population to its side and penetrated into local and central authorities (Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland); 3) states where fascist parties and organizations participated as equals in the governments of military and military-monarchical dictatorships (Austria, Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Romania and Yugoslavia); 4) countries where fascism has reached the stage of a state-formed system of domination. There were four of them: Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Until the mid-30s, the fascist system of Italy served as a model. With the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, the role of the standard of world fascism passed to it.
Despite all the differences in programs, ideology, and political structures, fascism is a single historical phenomenon.
The most serious consequences were the Nazis' coming to power in Germany in January 1933. There were several reasons for the National Socialists' victory. Firstly, during the global economic crisis, the German Reichstag (parliament) quickly lost the trust of voters, not being able to offer them a way out of the current situation. Under these conditions, the influence of radical parties - the National Socialists and Communists - grew. The left movement of Germany (communists and social democrats) was in a state of fierce opposition to each other and was unable to join forces at the right time and rally against fascism. This happened because the German communists were under the strong influence of the Stalinist CPSU (b) and shared its thesis that “socialists are now more dangerous for us than fascists” (since they stand for the peaceful evolution of capitalism, “eroding” the labor movement). Repeated calls by Social Democrats to unite in the face of the fascist danger remained unanswered. Secondly, one of the most attractive points of Hitler’s program for the Germans was the demand to abandon the Treaty of Versailles, which was humiliating for Germany. Thirdly, paradoxically, the post of chancellor was offered to Hitler precisely out of fear of the emergence of a dictatorship - but a dictatorship of the left. Hitler, in comparison with the communists who threatened world revolution, looked quite safe.
After the Nazis came to power, there was a rapid consolidation of supporters of the totalitarian regime and the liquidation of the political system of the Weimar Republic: 1) all parties and trade unions (except the NSDAP) dissolved themselves or were banned; 2) self-government of the lands was abolished and administrative centralization began; 3) the party bodies of the NSDAP began to perform state functions and ultimately merged with the state apparatus. At the same time, the party relied not only on a powerful and extensive punitive apparatus and total ideological control, but also on numerous public organizations.
The global trend of increasing state influence in the economy has also manifested itself in Germany. Since 1934, economic management has been radically changed: 1) all business unions have come under the authority of the Ministry of Economics; 2) an all-empire economic chamber was created; 3) military production, which became the main condition for economic growth and the elimination of unemployment, was allocated to a separate group. In 1936, the country adopted a “four-year plan” for economic development. The main goal of the plan was to create its own raw material base and prepare the economy and army for war, which indicated that Germany was emerging from the crisis.
The fascists' rise to power had a profound impact on international relations. The National Socialists gained power under the slogans of revising the Versailles order and intended to put these slogans into practice. Hitler considered the main task of his foreign policy to be the implementation of “national self-determination of the Germans” (as he understood it). But Germany could not afford to enter into conflict at once with all states that did not share its plans. In the first years of the National Socialists' stay in power, German foreign policy was based, firstly, on Germany's peaceful relations with all its neighbors on a bilateral basis, and, secondly, on rejection of the existing world order as a whole. In line with the same policy, Germany normalized relations with the USSR. This friendly gesture towards the USSR was made against the backdrop of anti-communist repressions within Germany, to which, however, there was no official reaction from the Soviet government. The reason for this position of the USSR was probably the fear of finding itself in a war on two fronts - against Japan in Asia and against Germany in Europe, which forced the Soviet leadership to be extremely cautious in its foreign policy steps.

Classificationally, Interbellum is included in modern times, being its first stage. Traditionally, it covers the period from November 1918 (the end of the First World War) to September 1939 (the beginning of the Second World War), although in some cases the boundaries of the interwar period may vary somewhat depending on the dates of the end/beginning of large-scale armed conflicts in specific countries. For example, in a number of Russian works, the interwar period refers to the period from 1918 to 1941 (from the end of the First World War to the beginning of the Great Patriotic War), or from 1922 to 1941 (from the end of the Civil War to the beginning of the Great Patriotic War).

Brief description of the period

The initial stage of the interwar period takes place against the backdrop of the socio-cultural and economic recovery of the world community after the shocks of the First World War. Countries that won the war experienced rapid economic and cultural growth during this period (the so-called Roaring Twenties). At the same time, states that were defeated in war or destroyed by internal conflicts are, at best, in a state of deep stagnation (a typical example is the economic crisis and hyperinflation in Germany in 1921-1923), at worst, they are struggling for existence (Civil War in Russia). Gradually, however, the situation in them is stabilizing - the NEP period begins in the RSFSR, the German Weimar Republic is experiencing the “Golden Twenties”, etc. In addition, as a result of the First World War and related socio-political conflicts in Europe, a large number of independent states that were previously part of collapsed empires. Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia emerge in central Europe; In addition, Ireland is seeking relative independence from Great Britain. Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania appear on the map of eastern Europe. For some time, Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and the Caucasus states existed as independent Soviet republics, which since 1922 were captured by the Bolshevik government and forcibly brought into the USSR.

This stage of the interwar period is characterized by cultural flourishing - in the 1920s, artists Pablo Picasso, Diego Rivera, Chaim Soutine and others, writer and artist Jean Cocteau, writers Ernest Hemingway, Erich Maria Remarque, Francis Scott Fitzgerald, David Herbert Lawrence, Mikhail Bulgakov were actively creating. , Ivan Bunin and others. In Western architectural and decorative arts, the Art Deco style emerges, while in the USSR the 1920s are the era of constructivism.

In the wake of the gloomy impressions of the First World War - the largest military conflict in world history at that time, the League of Nations was created - an international organization whose goal was to preserve peace and prevent military conflicts, as well as stimulate economic growth between the member countries of the League. However, its activities from the very beginning did not develop the expected effectiveness - in particular, the USA never joined it and the USSR did not join for a long time (until 1934), and the governments of a number of member countries, such as Germany, Italy and Japan, by 1930 -years already openly demonstrated their belligerence. The situation was aggravated by a number of local crisis situations, such as

Economic development of Japan in 1919 - 1939. During the years of the First World War, Japan became significantly enriched and ensured the further growth of its industry. However, the post-war economic crisis of 1920 - 1921. hit Japan particularly hard due to its exclusive dependence on foreign markets. The crisis simultaneously highlighted the weaknesses of the Japanese economy:

• 1) uneven development of individual industries;
• 2) lagging agriculture;
• 3) the emergence of numerous speculative enterprises. During the years of crisis, Japanese exports fell by 40%, imports by 30%, and the level of industrial production decreased by 20%.

In addition, on September 1, 1923, a powerful earthquake occurred in Japan. The Tokyo-Yokohama region suffered the most. 140 thousand people died, material losses were estimated at 5 billion yen. The Japanese government provided assistance to the victims and primarily to large entrepreneurs. All types of payments were deferred to them and compensation was paid for the damage caused. Such assistance became a significant basis for Japan's industrial recovery.

During 1924 - 1926. There is rapid growth in construction, metallurgy, shipbuilding and other industries, as well as trade. As a result, the value of gross factory output increased from 6.6 billion to 7.1 billion yen. The greatest successes were achieved in the metallurgical, mechanical engineering and chemical industries. However, the leading role was still played by the cotton industry, which accounted for over 40% of total industrial production. Moreover, Japanese products successfully competed in the world market with goods from other countries.

During the period of industrial growth (1924 - 1926), the formation of Japanese mechanical engineering as an independent industry was completed. Every year the number of engines used in plants and factories increased. Thus, from 1918 to 1929 their power increased more than 4 times and amounted to 4.5 million hp. At the same time, there was a process of concentration of production. In 1929, enterprises employing over 50 people produced 61% of all industrial output.

Japanese big capital increasingly strengthened its hegemony in the most important sectors of the economy. Thus, the Mitsubishi and Sumitomo concerns increased their capacity in heavy industry, Mitsubishi and Yasuda - in the credit and foreign trade industries. The processes of concentration of production and capital during the war and post-war period completed the formation of monopolistic associations in the form of family concerns - zaibatsu, uniting dozens of various enterprises under the control of the parent family company, which covered the main sectors of the economy. Unlike the financial and industrial monopolies of the West, zaibatsu were formed not as a result of competition, but through special commercial and industrial privileges that were given by the state to special family clans. The close ties of monopolistic associations with clan families made zaibatsu closed concerns whose shares were not widely circulated.

A characteristic feature of zaibatsu was their versatility. Thus, the Mitsubishi concern in the 20s. controlled about 120 companies with a total capital of 8,900 million yen, including railway, electrical engineering companies, as well as enterprises in the metallurgical, mining, shipbuilding and cotton industries. The zaibatsu maintained close contacts with the ruling circles.

The state continued to play the role of the largest entrepreneur in the 20s. The technical level of state-owned enterprises was significantly higher than that of private ones. The state provided about 2/3 of all investments in the country's economy. Most of them were provided by the zaibatsu.

However, Japan's economic situation was tense. Characteristic was the huge liability of foreign trade, which indicated the weak competitiveness of goods. Often, Japanese entrepreneurs, in order to maintain a position in Asian markets, resorted to exporting their goods at low prices.

Japan's industrial boom was short-lived and fragile. Already at the end of 1926 - beginning of 1927, a reduction in the volume of industrial production began. In 1927, most factories were underutilized by 1/4. During 1925 - 1927 the number of workers decreased by 10%. The industrial crisis in March - April 1927 was supplemented by a financial one. It affected the credit and banking system and manifested itself in the bankruptcy of a number of trading houses and banks. At the same time, the power of the largest banks strengthened. Thus, five of them (Mitsui, Mitsubishi, Yasuda, Sumito and Daiichi) in 1928 had 35% of all bank deposits in the country, and together with the other nine banks - 55% of deposits." It should also be taken into account that more and more Japan's dependence on foreign markets and sources of raw materials increased.

Japan's agriculture was actually in a state of crisis throughout 1919 - 1928. This was the main reason for the low standard of living of workers. In addition, Japanese employers sought to earn their profits by intensifying the work of workers. All this led to internal political instability in the country. As a result, in March 1927, the government of General Tanaka came to power, developing its plan called the “Tanaka Memorandum,” which envisaged a strategic course for establishing virtual world domination of Japanese imperialism through violent aggression. The beginning of this plan was supposed to be Japan's attack on China. However, the manifestation of the first symptoms of the approaching global economic crisis and the escalation of internal political struggle in July 1929 led to the resignation of the Tanaka government.

Thus, 1919 - 1928 became for Japan a period of searching for ways to further develop the economy, where measures of forceful pressure on entrepreneurs were closely intertwined with encouragement and assistance to them. The greatest results were achieved in heavy industry, a characteristic feature of which was a focus on the production of weapons.

At the end of 1929, an unprecedented economic crisis broke out in capitalist countries, which began in October with a stock market shock in the United States. Due to the close economic ties between these countries, the crisis hit Japan very hard. It highlighted the economic weakness and comparative backwardness of Japanese capitalism. Gross value of production of the factory industry for 1929 - 1931. decreased from 7.4 billion to 5 billion yen, or by 32%. Production volumes in the coal, metallurgical, cotton and shipbuilding industries decreased significantly.

An even heavier blow was dealt to agriculture, the cost of production of which decreased by almost 60% during this period. It should be borne in mind that in Japan agriculture played a much larger role than in other capitalist countries. The agricultural sector of the economy was among the first to feel the brunt of the decline. A particularly threatening situation developed in sericulture, where about 50% of peasant farms were occupied, and the export of raw silk reached 30% of Japanese exports abroad. As a result of the crisis in the United States, the main importer of Japanese raw silk, its exports decreased and prices fell catastrophically. Declining prices for silk, rice, etc. led to a reduction in the volume of agricultural products by 40%.

During the years of crisis, Japanese exports as a whole decreased. In 1931, it fell by half compared to 1929. It should be taken into account that about 20% of the country's gross national product was exported. The narrowing of both the external and internal markets has led to a huge accumulation of unsold commodity values.

It must be emphasized that in most industries that served the domestic market with traditional Japanese goods - national clothing, shoes, umbrellas, ceramics, etc. - the industrial revolution had not yet been completed.

In such difficult conditions, Japanese government circles tried to find a way out of the crisis, shifting the main burden onto the shoulders of the working masses. Widespread job cuts were practiced. Number of unemployed for 1929 - 1933 increased to 3 million people, wages decreased. The rationalization of production, its concentration and centralization accelerated, which was accompanied by the massive ruin of the petty and middle bourgeoisie. The already severe exploitation of the colonies increased.

In this situation, military-nationalist layers both in the government and in the opposition, being active supporters of an aggressive foreign policy and the militarization of the Japanese economy, made open calls for an even greater strengthening of these processes. A course was developed to develop a military-inflationary situation. In accordance with it, an embargo on the export of gold and the abandonment of the yen gold standard were introduced. The accelerated issuance of paper banknotes, not backed by either gold or commodity equivalent, and the flooding of the market with government debt obligations created the opportunity for the government to use additional funds for military needs. Military production brought the highest profits to Japanese entrepreneurs. So, for 1932 - 1936. leading concerns received military orders worth 5.5 billion yen, and the net profit of Japanese joint-stock companies from 1931 to 1936 increased 2.3 times. If in the 1935/36 budget year the share of military orders amounted to 45% of all budget expenditures, then in 1937/38 they reached 73.5% of the Japanese budget expenditures.

Thus, the difficult economic situation in both Germany and Japan in the post-war period was due to a decrease in industrial production and a drop in exports, which led to a reduction in the number of workers and an increase in unemployment.

militarization Japan Germany Dawes

Instability in the post-war period. General protests against high tariffs, high lending rates and the rising cost of living caused a major social crisis in the immediate aftermath of the war. Western farmers' organizations demanded the transfer of natural resources and public utilities into public ownership, as well as the introduction of strictly regulated taxes on individual and corporate incomes, sharp reductions in tariffs, and electoral reform.

There was a growing reform movement in Protestant circles, which had begun even before the war. Many clergymen, such as Salem Bland and James Woodsworth, openly supported the demands of farmers and workers. While businessmen, many politicians and most newspapers demanded repressive measures, a wave of strikes initiated by trade unions swept across the country; These strikes began as early as 1918 and reached their peak with the Winnipeg General Strike in May–June 1919. Almost all of the city's workers went on strike for six weeks, supporting the demands of workers in the construction and metal industries for recognition of the right of trade unions to collective bargaining and higher wages. The federal government sided with the entrepreneurs; it sent militia and Mounted Police to Winnipeg, who arrested strike leaders and dispersed mass protest marches.

Defeat on the economic front convinced many Canadian workers and farmers of the need to turn to organized political activity. Four socialists - the leaders of the Winnipeg strike, English by birth, while still in prison, were elected to the legislature of the province of Manitoba in 1920. In 1921, Woodsworth, who was charged with sedition (although he was never brought to trial) , became the first member of the federal parliament from the socialist party.

Election of Mackenzie King. After Laurier's death, William Lyon Mackenzie King (grandson of the leader of the 1837 uprising) became the leader of the Liberal Party. King had an inexpressive appearance, was not a brilliant speaker, and remained a bachelor all his life; he felt a deep need to restore the good name of his grandfather, who led the anti-colonial uprising in Upper Canada. His strength as a politician lay in the fact that, unlike the Liberals who took part in the coalition government, he did not cease to support Laurier during the political crisis associated with the introduction of universal conscription, and therefore maintained his popularity in Quebec. This was especially important for liberals, since the leader of the Conservatives in the federal elections of 1921, Arthur Meighen, was one of the ardent advocates of introducing universal conscription. Meighen, who became prime minister in place of Borden, who resigned due to illness, campaigned for the election by maintaining the old program of the coalition government - in particular, the need for high protective tariffs.

King conducted his election campaign very carefully, appealing to farmers and workers and promising them guarantees against unemployment, old-age pensions and several other reforms; at the same time, he tried not to aggravate relations with business circles. In the western provinces and in Ontario, the Progressive Party was created, reflecting the interests of farmers; The party platform was based on demands for lower tariffs and “reciprocity” in trade with the United States. Finding themselves in a difficult position, the Conservatives won 50 seats in parliament, while the Liberals won 117, winning all the electoral districts of Quebec. The Progressives came in second in terms of seats in the House of Commons, with 65 seats. Thus, in 1921, the beginning of a multi-party government in Canada was laid.

King was unable to convince the Progressives to enter into a coalition with him, but by making small concessions on the issue of tariffs on imported agricultural equipment, he ensured that they did not vote against his government in the House of Commons. Quebec's support was secured by appointing Ernest Lapointe as Minister of Justice and giving him virtually unlimited powers in all matters affecting the interests of French Canada. Some progressives, however, sharply criticized King for his handling of labor disputes in Nova Scotia, where coal and steel companies cut workers' wages by more than 30%. King, although he repeatedly stated that the federal government had no constitutional right to interfere in this purely internal matter of the province, nevertheless authorized the use of force against the strikers and the arrest of their leaders on charges of sedition. He ignored protests by right-wingers in the Maritime Provinces (including members of his own party) who said federal government policies were undermining the region's economy.

Connections with other members of the British Commonwealth. King's government received support from progressives primarily for the successes it achieved in Canadian foreign policy. In 1922, when the threat of war with Turkey loomed over England, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George turned to the dominions for support. Like Laurier, King did not want to take on obligations associated with too close interaction with the mother country, and therefore refused to take part in military actions against Turkey. This episode, known in history as the Chanak Incident, marked the establishment of Canada's independent foreign policy. The Imperial Conference of 1923 supported King that the dominions should have the right to conduct an independent foreign policy, and at the Imperial Conference of 1926 the so-called The Balfour Declaration, which defined the Dominions as "autonomous units within the British Empire, equal in status, not in any respect subordinate to one another in their internal or external affairs, although united by a common subjection to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations" . This principle was formally enshrined in the Statute of Westminster in 1931, which declared Canada and the other dominions to be fully equal and independent in foreign and domestic policy. However, even after this, the Canadian constitution could only be changed by the English Parliament, and the legal committee of the British Privy Council remained the highest court of appeal in Canada.

Problems of the country's welfare. Canada's economic recovery in 1920 was hampered by business scandals and stagnation in some provinces. In the Maritime Provinces, the post-war decline in production continued until 1929. However, for most Canadians, this decade was generally prosperous. The start of mass production of cars forced provincial administrations to repair existing highways and build new ones. Increasing costs of this kind caused friction between the provinces and the federal government, which controlled most of the budget revenues. Writers and artists (notably the famous Group of Seven) confidently developed Canadian themes, despite the influence of American culture. An increasing number of Canadians became urban residents - by 1931 they made up 54% of the country's total population. In the steppe provinces, farmers united and created their own organizations for storing and marketing grain - wheat pools, which turned into powerful marketing agencies.

At the same time, the completion of the railway from Winnipeg to Churchill on the shores of Hudson Bay reduced the cost of transporting exported grain.

In English-speaking Canada, there was a rise in Protestant fundamentalism, accompanied by demands for strict Sunday observance and a ban on the sale of alcoholic beverages. However, provincial governments were unable to prevent massive liquor smuggling; as a result, by the mid-1920s, most provinces had repealed Prohibition, instead introducing government controls over the sale of alcoholic beverages. As the United States maintained Prohibition, a complex smuggling system developed, with not only alcoholic beverages, but also other goods being transported across the border.

King's second election victory. In the 1925 elections, the Conservatives won a majority of seats in Parliament, which made King's government even more dependent on the support of the Progressives. Shortly thereafter, evidence surfaced of corruption among customs officials who were allowing illicit cargo through in exchange for bribes. When this scandal broke in June 1926, King, realizing that he could no longer count on the support of progressives against the Tories in the House of Commons, approached the Governor-General, Sir Julian Byng, with a proposal to dissolve Parliament and call a general election. Byng refused him and suggested that Arthur Meighen form a new government. However, within a week, the conservatives, having lost the support of the progressives, were defeated. Meighen had to ask for the dissolution of parliament, and this time Byng granted this request. During the run-up to the September 1926 elections, the Liberals, ignoring the customs scandal, argued that the Governor General had violated Canada's autonomy by refusing to comply with King's first demand for the dissolution of Parliament. They accused him of interfering in Canada's internal affairs and supporting Canadian Conservatives to the detriment of the Liberals. The liberals won the elections.

This time King had a majority of only three votes in parliament. In practice this meant that the balance of power lay in the hands of two Labor Members of Parliament, A.A. Heaps and J.S. Woodsworth. They began to support the government after King agreed to introduce an old-age pension system. This successful use of parliamentary methods in the struggle for reform convinced the leaders of the workers' and farmers' movement of the need to create a new socialist party on a national scale. Such a party was the Federation of Cooperative Commonwealth (FCC), founded in 1932 and uniting representatives of the radical wing of progressives, trade unionists and socialists.

Years of depression. The main factor that contributed to the creation of the FCC and other similar organizations was the deep depression that followed the collapse of the New York Stock Exchange stock market in the fall of 1929. Canada, heavily dependent on the export of grain, fish and timber, was seriously affected by the sharp decline in international trade, which covered almost all sectors of the economy in the western steppe and Primorye provinces. In the cities, workers, under pain of losing their livelihood, were forced to accept the most meager wages. By 1933, unemployment reached 23%.

Despite the dire situation, Mackenzie King refused to resort to large-scale measures to help the unemployed, insisting on the need for a balanced budget and “respect for provincial rights.” King and his party, who did not have a program for overcoming the crisis and overcoming the depression, suffered a crushing defeat in the elections in the fall of 1930. Under the leadership of their new leader Richard Bedford Bennett, the Conservatives received a majority of 31 seats in parliament. Immediately after the elections, Bennett passed through parliament a law allocating $20 million to organize public works and provide assistance to provinces and municipalities. At the same time, he significantly increased tariffs. And although his policies helped some firms and companies that received soft loans to organize work, overall they seriously slowed down the economic recovery from the depression. In 1932, an agreement was concluded to reduce customs tariffs for countries belonging to the British Commonwealth, but this did not have a noticeable impact on Canada's foreign trade.

As the depression deepened, social and political instability grew. In Alberta, the Social Credit Party, led by radio preacher William Aberhart, won the election in 1935; this party promised farmers - agriculturalists and pastoralists - that it would establish fair prices and credit proportional to the amount of goods produced or services provided. The FCC called for the establishment of socialism in Canada. During these same years, other reformist social organizations and movements came to power: in Ontario - the Liberals, under the leadership of Mitchell Hepburn, who opposed King, and in Quebec - the National Union Party under the leadership of Maurice Duplessis. Although it quickly became clear that these parties were essentially conservative and served the interests of entrepreneurs, their success showed that the federal Conservative government was not taking sufficient measures to lift the country out of the depression. Although Bennett created several large public corporations, such as the Bank of Canada and the CBC, this had little impact on economic recovery.

In 1935, under growing political pressure, Bennett formulated his reform program, called the New Deal. He quickly passed legislation through parliament to make it easier for farmers to obtain loans, created an office for the marketing of natural resources; Parliament passed laws on social insurance and unemployment insurance, on the minimum wage and limiting the length of the working day. These measures met with support among a small number of FCC members, but liberals disputed their constitutionality; They suggested that Bennett was deliberately pushing through Parliament laws that he knew would be overturned by the courts as being outside the powers of the federal government. And although reformist legislation was passed, Bennett's New Deal caused a split among conservatives themselves. As a result, the Conservatives were defeated in the 1935 elections, and the Liberals again came to power under the leadership of Mackenzie King.

The new Liberal government brought the laws passed by the Bennett government to the Supreme Court, which found most of them unconstitutional because they violated the prerogatives of provincial governments. King then created a special commission that was supposed to analyze the issue of the relationship between the federal government and the provinces. The report of this commission, published in 1940, contained recommendations to strengthen the role of the federal government in the country's economy, as well as to give it responsibility for social security on a national scale. In 1940, King achieved the passage of an amendment to the British North America Act, according to which the federal government received the right to create a national unemployment insurance system.